I used them only in metro/locker. I find the regular 320 to be the best in other maps. I must say that I used the LVG often to try to help my teammates push beyond the choke points. Everyone stacks up by the stairs on metro near B; with a good squad I could clear that area and let the support players hold it down as we move forward. Some matches were just stalemates with contrast nades everywhere though.

You're missing the fact that the M320 LVG (the entire point of this thread) wasn't in BC2, and so the game is irrelevant to the conversation, you just simply can't compare something that isn't there. I made a comparison to BF3 strictly in the change of mechanics for the LVG, I did not compare BF3 Assault to BF4 Assault, because they are a slightly different beast. Objectively speaking in the context of this thread though, Assault has not changed from Battlefield 3 to 4.

I think it's relevant to discuss the general changes in the assault class here because the whole LVG thing (in both BF3 and BF4) is just symptomatic of a decline in the class. They clearly put those things in to allow assault to dominate the densely close quarters sections of maps, because the class wasn't performing well in the game in general otherwise. It was introduced in Close Quarters afterall and it's stuck around because it did it's one job just too damn well. It made assault hyper effective on metro and locker, which are hugely popular.

But you wouldn't need that stupid thing period if assault kept a superiority in infantry combat and maybe had some gadget flexibility ala BC2. The situation is even worse in BF4 because of map design and because the carbines are even better than before compared to the other weapons.

You basically said something similar in your post, which I was responding to.

BC2 is not proper battlefield. It doesn't warrant comparisons.

In my opinion the biggest nerf to the medic/assault class has been regenerating health for everyone.

I facepalmed when the LVG was added to BF3, and I'm glad it's been nerfed. Should be removed.

BC2 is widely regarded among many as one of the best titles in the entire franchise and I tend to agree. It is absolutely a full featured battlefield game and I think it's relevant to look at the successes and failures or all the design features of the entire franchise when talking about class balance.

And it's still pretty clear to me that the LVG was put in specifically to give assault some special teeth when playing on infantry maps.

With the nerf as things stand, LVG is more or less an extended range hand grenade, and that's not a bad thing, no removal necessary. Of course I still think the absurdly linear map design in locker/metro is a terrible idea for more than 32 players but that's another issue (albeit one linked to the whole LVG thing). Locker/Metro style maps are here to stay and so is the LVG.

I do find it silly that they are nerfing things that are only a problem on two maps.

Remember the medic spam debate for bf3?

I DO remember the medic spam debate for bf3, and it was well warranted. It simply broke infantry dominated urban maps where two or more guys working together become indestructible forces of nature. I understand that teamwork should boost your effectiveness on the battlefield, but it should NOT enable you invincibility. BF4 revive mechanics work much better overall.

So let us compare the LVG with the medic spam:

The LVG is shit on maps with more than five corridors. That being said, it dominates maps with five or less corridors, AND it requires nothing more than a click of a button to obtain dozens of kills. Similar to how paddles were in BF3, they essentially created something that does nothing to half the maps, and breaks the other half of them. As I would rather have something pointlessly outclassed than game-breaking, the logical choice would be to nerf the object in question. Therefore, the nerf was justifiable.

The problem with this argument is that a series of nerfs and class loadout challenges and map design choices have basically taken all the chutzpah out of the assault class.

Support got the excellent XM25, has a couple of neat little toys that aren't of much general use, but still has the uber ammo box.

And assault has.....a nerfed revive system that is so gimped that the number of revives in a general map can be counted on both hands (this was not true in BF2, 2142, etc, etc). The population of assault players outside of metro/locker is tiny. The healing advantage assault had is gone (everyone heals fairly quickly now). They don't dominate infantry combat because the LMGs are quite effective and the carbines are almost as good as the ARs.

Assault as a class purely caters to LVG spamming on lockers metro; also the only two maps where you'd really want the AR over a carbine + other cool toys. The class just got hit with too many nerfs, and the maps focused on needing anti-armor more than before.

Support got the excellent XM25, has a couple of neat little toys that aren't of much general use, but still has the uber ammo box.

And assault has.....a nerfed revive system that is so gimped that the number of revives in a general map can be counted on both hands (this was not true in BF2, 2142, etc, etc). The population of assault players outside of metro/locker is tiny. The healing advantage assault had is gone (everyone heals fairly quickly now). They don't dominate infantry combat because the LMGs are quite effective and the carbines are almost as good as the ARs.

Assault as a class purely caters to LVG spamming on lockers metro; also the only two maps where you'd really want the AR over a carbine + other cool toys. The class just got hit with too many nerfs, and the maps focused on needing anti-armor more than before.

Doesn't the defensive field upgrade offer faster health recovery outside of combat? If so, there is another nail in the coffin.

I used to have something against the assault class. I used to rail on about how the medic spam was ruining the game.

I see now that I was wrong. The LVG nerf and the defib nerf are similar. Changing things that are only a problem
in small subsets of the game really isn't the way to go.

It's a really hard topic to argue until we get some facts. Until then it's mostly just opinion.

The LVG shined in Metro and Locker, yes, but it was quite effective out in the wild as well.
At medium distance you could learn how to shoot it at the ground so that it bounced straight to an opponent's feet. Very useful when you knew somebody was hiding behind cover or a corner.
At very long distances it behaved a lot like the HE, exploding on contact.
All in all it was very versatile.

I find the nerf a bit unnecessary, but the truth is that sometimes on Metro it was much too easy to spam.
I think that the ammo refill nerf would have been sufficient. The problem was not the grenades by themselves, but the fact that you could stand on an ammo pack and spam them all day long, with no delays.

Also, anybody who says that assault is not a very powerful class needs to play more TDM/Domination.
Med packs are invaluable.
Defibrillators, if people would use them more often, can make the difference between a lose or a win.
M26 is a great weapon to switch to when you expect lots of people in CQC.
ACE 23/AEK/SCAR-H are some of the strongest weapons in the game.
Assault is as strong as ever.

Also, I just read the previous page. Whoever said Carbines were so-so in BC2 needs to have his head checked. The engineer weapons were some of the best weapons in the game.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Witchalok" (Apr 7th 2014, 1:35pm)

It's funny because back in BF3 everyone complained about how shit it was and then now everyone complains about how good it is (was)

There's a reason for that. In BF3 it was rubbish because it didn't bounce as much, had a longer delay before exploding and didn't do as much damage (if I recall correctly). In BF4 they increased the potency of it too much, so that in any confined space it became the no-skill weapon of choice - no need to aim, no need to see the enemy, just fire at a wall near where they are and wait for the kill.

I have had situations in locker where I have been behind the wall separating the upper entrance tunnel into the main guard tower (C flag on CQL) from from the cafeteria flag (B on CQL) and still been killed by the damn thing and that is just silly.

As has been said elsewhere, what the assault class needs (apart from more ammo) is a GL or similar that does decent damage to vehicles, so that it is not the only class in the bigger maps that is completely useless against them. As it stands, the density and effectiveness of vehicles on most maps is so great that anyone going as assault finds themselves instantly at a huge disadvantage.

The LVG shined in Metro and Locker, yes, but it was quite effective out in the wild as well.
At medium distance you could learn how to shoot it at the ground so that it bounced straight to an opponent's feet. Very useful when you knew somebody was hiding behind cover or a corner.
At very long distances it behaved a lot like the HE, exploding on contact.
All in all it was very versatile.

I find the nerf a bit unnecessary, but the truth is that sometimes on Metro it was much too easy to spam.
I think that the ammo refill nerf would have been sufficient. The problem was not the grenades by themselves, but the fact that you could stand on an ammo pack and spam them all day long, with no delays.

Also, anybody who says that assault is not a very powerful class needs to play more TDM/Domination.
Med packs are invaluable.
Defibrillators, if people would use them more often, can make the difference between a lose or a win.
M26 is a great weapon to switch to when you expect lots of people in CQC.
ACE 23/AEK/SCAR-H are some of the strongest weapons in the game.
Assault is as strong as ever.

Also, I just read the previous page. Whoever said Carbines were so-so in BC2 needs to have his head checked. The engineer weapons were some of the best weapons in the game.

TDM/Dom are not core BF gameplay. Conquest is, and the classes should be balanced around that. Obviously with variation depending on the map, but the averaging should make all classes equally viable.

Obviously if you remove vehicles completely and/or transportation distances assault gets much more viable, but Dom is basically an "infantry focused" version of conq, and TDM is even more watered down.

Strongest weapons don't make up for a lot of other deficiencies, especially when the carbines are truly nearly as good in most gameplay situations.

Assault is not as strong as ever, the class is barely used over a wide range of conq maps and the number of revives on most maps around 10 per team, generally less. I have not played a single round where reviving has decided the outcome of a conquest large round. Not even metro/lockers, where the rounds are generally decided by majority flag control.

I must admit that it was fun to find a group of idiots just standing at the bottom (or top depending on which team) of the stairs in metro. With a great support player on my team I could easily clear out that entire group with a LVG and let him go down to offer a hold on the zone to help advance. More times than not we were able to push the other team all the way back to their base; not only because of the LVG.

The minis or LVG never bothered me. I found them easy to defend against in locker and metro and when people spammed this offered a unique opportunity for a great flank. This is especially true with the elevators in metro. Get two squads to go up the elevators with other squads push the stairs